[gentoo-dev] Last rites for sys-kernel-usermode-sources

2011-04-13 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
# Daniel Gryniewicz d...@gentoo.org (13 Apr 2011) # Masked for removal in 30 days. Functionality is merged into and maintained in # the upstream kernel. Use any kernel (e.g. gentoo-sources) instead. sys-kernel/usermode-sources Daniel

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs: genstef gems special edition

2009-03-24 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 23:08 +0100, Peter Alfredsen wrote: Since genstef has been .away for some time, I arranged with him that I'd send a list of his ebuilds that need maintenance to be put up for grabs. This list contains all ebuilds that have no herd, at least one open bug and where genstef

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: bash-4.0 regression heads up (escaped semicolons in subshells)

2009-02-24 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Sat, 2009-02-21 at 19:44 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: snip i'll tweak the eclasses to use quoting for now no one suggested doing any of this crap you're talking about. if you want to get all retarded, dont install the masked ebuild. i gave a heads up to people who

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: disable python and perl USE flags in profile

2008-12-09 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 04:09 +0200, Petteri Räty wrote: Maciej Mrozowski wrote: Following advise from https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=250179, I'm bringing it here. I think this is probably a good idea after EAPI 2 is stable and we eliminate built_with_use usage from the tree. I

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Proposal for how to handle stable ebuilds

2008-11-18 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Mon, 2008-11-17 at 19:08 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 10:10:57 -0500 Daniel Gryniewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 2008-11-16 at 18:38 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: snip The maintainer MUST NOT NEVER EVER NOT EVEN A LITTLE BIT remove the latest stable ebuild

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Proposal for how to handle stable ebuilds

2008-11-18 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 17:50 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 11:57:23 -0500 Daniel Gryniewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is not about arches just being slackers. This is about arches denying stable (or even ~) for some reason. If I cannot drop an old version

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Proposal for how to handle stable ebuilds

2008-11-18 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 15:18 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 11:57:23 -0500 Daniel Gryniewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 2008-11-17 at 19:08 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 10:10:57 -0500 Daniel Gryniewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 2008-11-16

Re: [gentoo-dev] zeroconf/avahi USE flag

2008-11-04 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 15:44 -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: snip bonjour is Apple specific branding for zeroconf. This is another case that needs to be changed. zeroconf/avahi/howl/bonjour/mdnsresponder all need to be condensed. I agree. Let's just have zeroconf. Daniel

[gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-cpp/{libbonobomm,libbonobouimm}

2007-06-19 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
Nothing in the tree depends on the, they don't currently build, and the last upstream release was 2003. Daniel -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-cpp/{libbonobomm,libbonobouimm}

2007-06-19 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 21:20 -0400, Daniel Gryniewicz wrote: Nothing in the tree depends on the, they don't currently build, and the last upstream release was 2003. Daniel Forgot: scheduled to be removed Jul 19; bug #182612 Daniel -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA issue: No stable skype in Tree

2007-06-13 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 17:36 +0100, Gustavo Felisberto wrote: A little background info: Right now there are three versions of net-im/skype in the tree: 1 - the 1.2 series (with a stable version) 2- the 1.3 series also with a stable version 3- the 1.4 series with a ~/hardmask version Also

Re: [gentoo-dev] New global use flag, xulrunner

2007-06-06 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 17:44 +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote: use.local.desc:dev-java/swt:xulrunner - Build native browser integration against xulrunner use.local.desc:dev-python/gnome-python-extras:xulrunner - Enable support for xulrunner instead of firefox

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: stabilizing expat 2.0.0

2007-05-19 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Fri, 2007-05-18 at 23:33 +0200, Christian Faulhammer wrote: Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Carsten Lohrke wrote: the amd64 team is unresponsive on even trivial stabilisation request form the KDE team as well, lately. welp's been away ;) welp does not touch KDE packages...

[gentoo-dev] Last rite app-misc/baobab

2007-05-03 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
+# Daniel Gryniewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] (3 May 2007) +# It's now part of gnome-utils; bug #176864 +app-misc/baobab Scheduled for removal June 2 2007 Daniel -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] tests

2007-05-01 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 15:08 +0200, Piotr Jaroszyński wrote: Hello, There was some discussion about forcing/not forcing tests in EAPI-1, but there was clearly no compromise. Imho, tests are very important and thus I want to discuss them a little more, but in more sensible fashion.

Re: [gentoo-dev] tests

2007-05-01 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 01:32 +0200, Marius Mauch wrote: I'd approach it a bit different: Before creating fixed classification groups I'd first identify the attributes of tests that should be used for those classifications. a) cost (in terms of runtime, resource usage, additional deps) b)

Re: [gentoo-dev] tests

2007-05-01 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 01:12 +0100, Stephen Bennett wrote: On Tue, 01 May 2007 19:46:56 -0400 Daniel Gryniewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There is one serious problem with this: Who's going to do the work to figure all this out for the 11,000 odd packages in the tree? This seems like

Re: [gentoo-dev] That time again...

2007-04-27 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Wed, 2007-04-25 at 20:12 -0400, Michael Cummings wrote: Any other cool updates in the last few weeks? (it's been 20 days since the last time I started this thread - at this rate, we might make enough input to make Chris' job on the gwn easier). For Gnome, 2.18.1 is almost entirely in the

Re: [gentoo-dev] forwarding a video

2007-03-05 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Mon, 2007-03-05 at 12:18 +0100, Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mike Frysinger wrote: no, i'm not directing this at any one person as i dont believe singling out any one person addresses anything in our case a video sent to out by a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: What do you think about removing gtk-1.2 theme engines from tree?

2007-02-26 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Sun, 2007-02-25 at 21:31 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: Andrej Kacian wrote: It makes sense slowly removing *applications* depending on gtk1. Themes should go last, along with gtk1 itself. Gtk1 is already ugly enough, do you want it to be even more ugly? Point, set, and match. Much

Re: [gentoo-dev] let's clear things up (was Slacker archs)

2007-02-20 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Tue, 2007-02-20 at 08:11 -0500, Stephen P. Becker wrote: On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 01:35:32 + Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is widely perceived that Gentoo has a huge problem with slacker archs cluttering up the tree and making maintainers' work harder. Clearly, something

Re: [gentoo-dev] GNOME 1.x and GNOME 1.x dependent package masking

2006-11-14 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Sat, 2006-11-11 at 22:55 +0200, Alin Nastac wrote: Paul de Vrieze wrote: On Friday 10 November 2006 16:28, Daniel Gryniewicz wrote: On Fri, 2006-11-10 at 08:56 +0100, Marius Mauch wrote: Ok, the list definitely isn't accurate. If there is a legitimate reason to mask

Re: [gentoo-dev] GNOME 1.x and GNOME 1.x dependent package masking

2006-11-10 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Fri, 2006-11-10 at 08:56 +0100, Marius Mauch wrote: Ok, the list definitely isn't accurate. If there is a legitimate reason to mask sylpheed-claws-1.x you also have to mask it's reverse deps. However I'm still waiting for the explanation why it is on that list. (I don't mind if it's masked

Re: [gentoo-dev] GeNUS : how I currently manage my gentoo network (200+ machines)

2006-10-23 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Sat, 2006-10-21 at 08:22 +0200, Hubert Mercier wrote: Hi, When I recently officially joined the Gentoo Project, I had the idea to share a part of my work, in the way of a scripts set I've been working on for more than 2 years now, which I called GeNUS (Gentoo Network Update System).

Re: [gentoo-dev] Orphaned packages

2006-09-18 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 20:00 +0100, Gustavo Felisberto wrote: The list of orphans is: net-misc/blogtk I'll take blogtk. Daniel signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Package Manager Specification: configuration protection

2006-09-13 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Wed, 2006-09-13 at 19:47 +0200, Benno Schulenberg wrote: Ciaran McCreesh wrote: * If no existing file with the intended target name exists, or if the existing file has identical content to the file to be installed, the file to be installed is installed as normal. I would much

Re: [gentoo-dev] proxy-dev (an alternative to sunrise?)

2006-07-30 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
, personally, find this to be a more useful function than a place to hold ebuilds not-yet in portage (although, I do that also). -- Daniel Gryniewicz Gentoo AMD64 Team / Gentoo Gnome Herd / Gentoo Kernel Herd / Gentoo Printing Herd AMD64 Operational AT Lead signature.asc Description: This is a digitally

Re: [gentoo-dev] Off with your heads!

2006-07-09 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Thu, 2006-07-06 at 20:46 -0600, Steve Dibb wrote: @devs, If your blog is being aggregated on Planet Gentoo / Universe, it's time to send us a copy of your smiling face. I'm putting out a request for some hackergotchis. Really, you don't want just a few of us to have all the fun,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Virtualization Herd

2006-07-03 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Mon, 2006-07-03 at 22:28 +0200, Benedikt Böhm wrote: On Monday 03 July 2006 21:56, Nick Devito wrote: Okay, in that case, extend the vserver herd to include a larger range of virtualization stuff, including Xen, Bochs, and so on. It just seems more fitting to group those packages

Re: [gentoo-dev] Virtualization Herd

2006-07-03 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Mon, 2006-07-03 at 20:15 -0600, Nick Devito wrote: Generating root filesystems for UML and Xen are basically the same process. I've heard of domi, but, bleh, I never could get it to work. I usually just make my images in chroot, and that usually works well. But, since the images are

Re: [gentoo-dev] sys-kernel/usermode-sources facing removal

2006-05-07 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Sun, 2006-05-07 at 14:40 +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: Hi, I've been wrangling with usermode-sources maintenance for some time now, but I don't have any interest in it and have no clue how it works. Any volunteers? If not, this package will be removed in 30 days. It will be put in

[gentoo-dev] Re: shoving utils from xpdf to poppler...

2005-12-28 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Wed, 2005-12-28 at 17:18 +0100, Carsten Lohrke wrote: Hi Daniel, what you've done breaks runtime dependencies, if not for other packages so at least for KDE. Such a change should be announced on the gentoo-dev mailing list before you do it. Also a tracking bug to coordinate

Re: [gentoo-dev] Moving GCC-3.4 to stable on x86

2005-11-28 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 19:12 +0100, Bjarke Istrup Pedersen wrote: Does this mean that we can get rid of the libstd++ dependency of gcc, and move it to the binary packages that depends on gcc 3.3 . I know this has been discussed before, but once it's stable I see no reason to keep the

Re: [gentoo-dev] app-admin/gwcc being removed

2005-11-01 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Thu, 2005-09-22 at 16:33 -0400, Daniel Gryniewicz wrote: Hi, all. app-admin/gwcc has security issues, and has been unmaintained upstream for 3 years. The Gnome herd is no longer interested in maintaining it. I've masked it, and will remove it in a couple of weeks, if no one steps

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 41: Making Arch Testers official Gentoo Staff

2005-09-12 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 19:53 -0400, Stephen P. Becker wrote: Let me clarify here. I'm not concerned about ATs having more privileges at all. I just want to know why if we're making them full developers for all intents and purposes, we don't go the extra step and get them commit access after a

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 41: Making Arch Testers official Gentoo Staff

2005-09-12 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 00:05 +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: Simon Stelling wrote: This has been in the todo-list for quite a while, but finally it's done. I'm curious what you think of it. I'm curious how much change this would involve for the people involved. Perhaps you could explain how

Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64

2005-09-01 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
council that (I hope) will be active in approving or rejecting GLEPs, perhaps someone should be writing a GLEP about combining x86 and amd64? -g2boojum- Just out of curiousity, what makes people think that the amd64 team will sit still for having all of x86 foisted off on them? -- Daniel

Re: [gentoo-dev] New Developer: dang

2005-05-22 Thread Daniel Gryniewicz
On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 09:59 -0500, Homer Parker wrote: On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 00:57 -0500, Jason Huebel wrote: It's with pleasure that I announce a new developer: Dang. Dang has been working as an Arch Tester for AMD64 for a while now and has proven himself to be an asset to the team.